I'm on the side of revealing as much as possible in a way that is natural as the recordings will allow.If the recordings aren't good enough,we shouldn't lower system resolution just to be kind to them.Let the recordings catch up,or fall behind if they're not good enough. Many of us can still enjoy music even when the recordings are poor anyway. Just have to live with them,i feel.
Yeah I’m in the same boat with you there in that I prefer resolution and neutrality above all. I think the issue is that a lot of the most resolving systems don’t preserve dynamics and for some audiophiles that’s a dealbreaker. It’s a dealbreaker for Paul for sure. I myself will sacrifice dynamics for maximum detail. I am of course referring to a Martin Logan system. At some point a well set up super resolving system will not make recordings sound worse but not sure if that’s true for all loudspeaker designs.
@michaeldina1103 Hi.I for one feel that the more we resolve,the more we can extract from the original performance and recover what the musicians played in the first place,which is surely the entire point with high fidelity. Why anyone would want to deliberately make a system "warm",or whatever is all somewhat alien and going against that objective, I feel. To each their own,of course,but if that objective is lost,what are we striving for? Martin Logan are good speakers. Heard a few from them.
I think that making "resolution" more important than the music does a great disservice to that music. Lesser performances with higher recording quality, is simply not an option. In the popular music genre, only playing the highest fidelity recordings means that you have to give up many important artists. In the classical music genre, the tradeoff is even worse. For my ears, every performance of let's say Beethovens 6th symphony is musically different and I am more than willing to put up with technical compromise before musical compromise. I feel sorry for the gearheads that are willing to give up important musical performances because of their lack of music appreciation. Sure, Audiophile can mean gearhead, but to me that is not "audiophile" (lover of music) rather technophile (lover of technology), I have more than one system and can get "the most" out of most recordings - at least so much that I never have the urge to give up on the music.
@ Well said! I use digital and vinyl and having those options helps me to offset that urge to impose that unrealistic expectation onto music that doesn’t deserve that judgment. This way I can enjoy all music that I enjoy without the inner audiophile getting in the way.
This is likely why some prefer Tube amps.. as they slightly change the sound signature. The other option, is to have a 2nd pair of speakers / headphones, that have less Fidelity. Thing is... I have rarely found music that I listen too... that doesnt sound better, with Audiophile grade speakers. The only time that happened, was when I was using very high end headphones, and a few very low quality MP3 files. I just found better versions of the same music, and the problem was solved.
@@banginghats2 For me that Lofi button is vinyl. Whenever I hear a recording through my DAC/ digital transport that sounds like it’s missing something. I just try to get it on vinyl. It loses resolution, but it gains something spiritual.
@@DeMorcan That’s fascinating! I’ve never heard a stand-alone R2R DAC. I’ve probably heard old school multi-bit through my dad’s old CD player. I wonder if I should try that? I know Fiio just came out with an inexpensive R2R. Well food for thought for me I guess. I currently use an ESS DAC that sounds good and smooth to me but I don’t have much reference. Will you share the make/model of old R2R you use? Edit: Adding the question at the end.
Go to a live classical concert in a good hall (with no mic of course). And then compare to your system. You cannot hear the very little details. You won’t hear the bow on the string the same way it is presented on some revealing system. Having a too revealing system can be like looking to a painted masterpiece with a microscope…
To an extent that’s very dependent on the size of the hall/room and distance from the players, plus, maybe the most critical aspect, is it full orchestral or chamber music? I’m lucky enough to live near a music performance venue relatively new so the halls were designed from scratch by acoustic engineers and it is quite possible to hear very fine nuances of the performers, but of course recordings allow much different microphone placements to what any member of the audience can achieve with their ears. One thing missing from recordings ( unless live) are the coughs, usually perfectly timed to coincide with the quietest most sensitive parts of the music. A friend of mine though really interested in classical had never been to a live performance, I persuaded him to come with me to listen to Hayden’s Nelson Mass, in a church, I asked him, afterwards what he thought- he replied, “ I like my hifi better.”
@@russellbaston974 Yes, hifi system can be a more pleasing experience, but I was just saying that the quest for most details as possible in a hifi is an audiophile’s maniac habit, not a quest for realism. I personally have 2 hifi setup; one very revealing for work in my professional studio (Buchardt A10) and one cheaper and less revealing in my living room ( Lintons with class A amp and mojo2). The Lintons are more like in hall realism for classical music.
Dear Paul, Thank you for including my question into your videos that I find very educative and informative. However, 😊I think you missed my point. My original question had certain intro trying to point out how (almost) all other electronics manufacturers are trying to make products with performacne consistent as much as possible without influence of any outer factors like cables, mains etc. My examples as an ortho surgeon are CT and MRI. Imagine that MRI needs "better cable" or power regenerator to deliver better images!🤔 And those devices need huge amount of power to work. Watching one of your other videos with topic about "what is definition of revealing system" you explained that those systems can be influenced with changing of cables, using power regenerator and other audiophile tweaks that allows user to gain better performance and that your tendency in PS audio is to produce such products. Therefore I wasn't reffering to better reproduction or more details, but on consistency and sort of "brand" or "desinger's sound signature" that can be resistant to any influence including "fly sitting on my preamp" as a metaphoric way to express what I wanted to point out. If I like that signature, I would buy that product, If I don't I would look elsewhere. I know how producing such devices would "kill" lots of other products and lots of snake oil on the market, most likey would take joy out of being in this hobby, but I wanted to hear proper explanation. Even I was very pleased to hear my (half of) question and my name in your video, I didn't get answer I was hoping for. Best regards Boris
This video makes it seems like there's a tradeoff. My experience thus far (JBL s4700 speakers) is that everything I do that makes the sound more natural with good recordings also makes bad recordings sound less bad. It's the overall relaxed feeling of the sound that helps everything, and you get that by improving the quality of all components in the system.
That can happen too. I've a number of songs that I once judged to be mediocre that magically got way better when I DIY upgraded my speakers. It's not just "confirmation bias"... I was actually hearing things in the recordings that I had never heard before. Unfortunately that also means I was hearing bad stuff in recordings I'd never noticed before... like the piano keyboard being backwards or the drum kit magically shifting from audience to stage perspective ... all kinds of little flaws. (But in fairness, I did find some of those flaws to be outright hilarious.)
@@Douglas_Blake Quick fix for those stage perspective drum recordings. Picture yourself sitting in the drummers seat, rear center stage looking out at the band. On live recordings the audience noise sounds much more natural in this perspective also.
@@slode1693 Naaa ... I've been there, doesn't sound the same. Actually you'd be amazed how much stuff is mixed from stage perspective. The most laughable is in videos when someone is at a keyboard ... they reach left the sound comes out to the right.
@@Douglas_Blake I hear you. The one that really pisses me off is when there are multiple instruments with the players singing parts and their voices are mixed to a different location than the instrument they're playing. Nickel Creek is really bad with this. They always mix the instruments the same, but the voices rarely match and change from song to song or even part. Love their music but all I can picture when I close my eyes is people with long rubbery necks moving their heads left and right.
Revealing vs. forgiving can be added to the list of other audiophile controversies: Analog vs. digital, tubes vs. solid state, best speaker types, etc.
In my world of growing up in the 60's and 70's I have tailored my 70's system to reproduce the music from that era so that it sounds great to me. I also enjoy finding new music and I find that music recorded or remastered in todays world also sounds very nice on my 70's system. Bottom line for me is I put together a nice 70's system that reproduces music that sounds great to me and I did not have to pay 5 figures to get it. Still enjoy Paul explaining all this technical stuff though 🙂
Listen from another room, I do it all the time (have music on while doing other things), I sit down 'properly' when I want to listen more critically. 😄
It is all about air. You couldn't hear a thing without air. Now, whether that air is excited by electrons moving matter that in turn pushes air or excited by 'live' acoustic vibration, it is still about air pressure on our tympanic membrane. There was a time when there was no choice but to listen to "live" source air pressure. Now, we have a choice. Choose the electron source and you will always have to accept compromise. Playing the game of trying to match live source sound with electron-produced sound is just that. . . a game. Listen to music live or listen to it through electronic means while accepting that the product of electronic sound will never be the same as the "real thing."
Agreed. I also think there is nothing wrong with enjoying listening to your system as it's own thing. The act of studio recording, mastering and replay in many cases creates a sound that intentionally cannot be reproduced at a live event.
@@user-od9iz9cv1w You might even say that "creating" electronic sound is an art form in and of itself. It is when you try and match it to "live" sound that it becomes a problem. But note that some of the greatest pianists that ever lived recorded their playing when electronic sound reproduction was very primitive compared to today. Listening to their playing embedded in the fog and noise of those early recordings and deciphering the beauty and expression of those keyboard artists has become a phenomenon that would seem inauthentic if it had been translated into a modern recording product. Somehow the imperfections make it more real.
I think there is a deeper point in the person’s question. Many hifi systems want to reveal more than there is in live music. As if a microscopic view of a painting would be better than the painting. I am often struck at how non-revealing live music is. And I don’t think hifi companies realize it. Just my take. But great video as usual.
I don’t think that’s the point at all. Most recorded music isn’t intended to be the same as live music. It’s performed, edited, mixed, and mastered to sound a certain way that satisfies the artist’s and producer’s vision for that record. That includes lots of techniques that can’t be reproduced live. What a revealing system does, for me anyway, is put the artist performing that record right in the room with me. Even though a lot of what I’m hearing never really could be performed live. To me, that level of intimacy with the music is enjoyable. To someone else, it might be a waste of a few thousand bucks. That’s why I never bag on anybody’s gear or setup. If it gives you joy listening to music you like, it’s a great system. Period.
First, I agree with Paul's take on revealing audio playback. But I did not hear this in the question posed. I think the question relates to embracing the sound of a system as delivered vs obsessing over tweaking it using cables or other tweaks that are not faithful to the designer's vision for what the sound signature should be. My answer is if you are happy with the system enjoy it out of the box. If you like to experiment knock yourself out, but have specific objectives before making purchases as it can become a consumer obsession.
i couldn't agree more. don't you wonder why mfg's of high end speakers don't require you to use 10k speaker cables to get the most out of their speakers? or include a disclaimer that anyone over 50 probably won't be able to enjoy the full capabilities of our speakers. some day i would like to hear music i listen to in the perfect room on the perfect system just to hear what i'm missing. on second thought that might not be such a good idea because i think i'm happy with what i have.
In the '70s I bought a second hand tube amp, and the treble stung like hell but was always fun to hear. Even when the treble was full up, with WAY too much sting, but still sounded great. Subjectively went right up there in high frequency, but wasn't fatiguing, like the best headphones treble on steroids. Maybe some speakers do that too. I build speakers and I can make really scratchy treble or silky treble by switching out a different crossover component. And in both cases, it's subjectively just as bright, but one sounds better. This type of tweaking only works with high treble content recordings, not with straight out distortion. You can have stinging treble that sounds good (even when it's wrong)...thanks to that valve amp that gave me the inspiration to keep that mind when I build my speakers.
I always find it interesting to hear a reviewer talk about their very expensive very "detailed" speakers. To then have them occasionally admit they can not listen to them very long at concert levels or they get fatigue when they compare them to some with less "detail". You've mentioned this about one of their go to "detailed" brands. But that does not mean there are not good resolving speakers that are not excessive. And unfortunately yes these will still show the difference between the quality of the sources. It just that the good stuff won't be annoying as well!
Here comes loudnesss correction. In my system I applied and it is constant challenge to match loudness with volume (specialy when I care for neighbours and listen silently) - every growth of volume needs less loudness characteristic - I already got used to it so thatI can't bear too "deep" sounding or too "lifted". Almost always adjustment is not accurate according to room requirements and/or source level but eventualy I turn knobs and get the neutral detail. It is engaging and a bit annoying and I think this is one of reasons why it is not offered
@@Mikexception Yes the human auditory system shows less sensitivity to lows and highs as the overall volume is lowered. That to have the balance across the bandwidth at lower volumes could be corrected by a "Loudness Contour". Which used to be included with receivers and integrated back in the day for that reason. Typically calibrated to Fletcher-Munson curves of equal-loudness contours for the human ear. Some of the better units even had adjustments to calibrate the curves for different speaker efficiencies.
If possible, I think having two systems work well with the question of «too revealing » and/or « not revealing enough». I’ve got a small valve amplifier and some sweet standmount speakers in a small room where I sit and listen to many enjoyable, but not well recorded albums. I don’t want to have it as my reference system, but it’s great to listen to when I’m just into something more relaxed listening.
Great music poorly recorded is the perfect reason to have two audio systems. For casual listening, good songs can be enjoyed on something basic and convenient like Sonos. Much like being in a car and grooving out to your favourite tunes.
Totally agree!!! However, we eat oatmeal every day. (E.g., car stereo, Sonos, etc…) Another analogy is having a race car and a daily driver. No one really wants to drive a drag strip car on the highway besides me. Lol! 😂 You’ll probably looking for comfort on those daily commutes but when the weekend comes, man o man watch out. “No headers” Same premise with hifi. When you have time to listen; let’s make it an experience. 😊
Here's my take. Good audio, highly resolving audio, allows one to now seek out those better recordings with a curiosity that may not have been there before. Because, it's just not the music, but rather, the sound of the music that captures us, the beauty of the sound of music.
Indeed. But, ulitmately even on mid-fi or chi-fi systems it is the quality of the recording that makes or breaks the sound of your system. I would not want some "house sound" from a company to get in the way of that. I want to hear the music on my recordings, not the 2khz dip in my speakers or the rising 6khz response of a DAC. That given ... it is not my system's responsibility to make music sound good. That is the job of the the mixing and mastering engineers who made the recording. And right about now I figure most of them are far better suited to driving trains.
@@Douglas_Blake I agree, well done recordings is where it starts, however, playing that recording through an 70's era transistor radio is where it ends.......badly.
@@PhotographyInFlight4183 My entire love of music and a good chunk of my interest in electronics was sparked by a "70s era transistor radio". Back then I didn't know or care about sound quality or frequency response and power... I just enjoyed the music itself.
I’m not going to go into all the details of my stereo rig, but I will discuss my amp and preamp. My amp, a McIntosh MC275 MkV (tube rolled to have slightly less tubey sound and have faster bass). My preamp, a Schiit Audio Freya+. When I want my rig to be revealing, I select passive or differential buffer output gain on my Freya+. When I want my rig to be less revealing, I select differential tube gain. I almost always select differential tube gain on my Freya+, the combination of the Freya+ in that mode and my tube rolled MC275 gives me superb imaging and soundstage, as well as some of the most beautiful music I’ve ever heard.
That's why I will never have such a higher end system. The music is more important to me. Even with my modest system, the differences between the recordings are very noticeable.
Not willing to hear perfect reproduction of music I hate (or at least does NOTHING for me) rather than music I love produced very nicely, but not perfectly. End of story.
The view is never better through frosted glass. High resolution systems reveal more and bring the music closer to the recorded performance. There it is Paul, "in ~20 words or less."
Good point! I will rather have a revealing system and fully enjoy great recordings, even though I miss a lot of tunes. Less great recordings does not deserve my rig :) If you have a mediocre rig everything sound just okey... What´s the fun in that. Meh...
The question is this: Is there such a thing as a system being too revealing, or are the issues we notice simply the result of bad recordings? It's akin to watching classic movies in 4K. While the enhanced resolution can bring stunning clarity, it can also reveal unintended details-like skin imperfections or duct tape holding a costume together-that detract from the intended experience.
That's a very good example. It's like going back to DVD's because you don't like seeing film grain on Blu-Rays. Why not? It's an integral part of the material you're enjoying. Same on old recordings, with good masterings you get to hear tape hiss and maybe some defects in the tape that you never noticed before
@ZeusTheTornado I personally enjoy hearing the subtle imperfections in music-a whisper in the background, a tap you never noticed before, or even the gentle hiss of tape. Live performances are rarely flawless; amplification can be off, your seat might not offer the best acoustics, or the venue itself might not be ideal for music. True perfection in sound is rare, no matter how often hi-fi aficionados claim otherwise. It's those little imperfections that make the experience unique and authentic.
Back in the early 2000s, when the loudness war was in full swing and CDs were still a thing, almost half of the service calls I did were "bad sound" and almost every one of them magically cleared up as soon as I put one of my test disks into the system. The "rule" is... If one or two recordings sound bad, get better recorcings. Don't mess with your equipment until they all sound bad.
Paul, foo foo up that oatmeal. Put in some apple chunks and cinnamon. Granola and cranberries or raisins. Blueberries or strawberries. Throw in a few nuts. Live in up and have fun. You’re not too old for change
I can enjoy every tyoe of recording at any volume on my revealing system. Every tune is consistently transparent and engaging, How? 1. Reduce background noise of the system with power filtering, grounding, physical isolation of all components, EMI/FRI shielded cables with ferrite rings. 2. Warm leaning Marantz Class AB amp with impressive bass 3. Dynaudio speakers built to Flechter-Munson curve paired with a Dynaudio subwoofer.
I think the best is to have each style available in the same system via a simple option in either the preamp or the crossover. Revealing vs musicality.
i can think of a way to 'tube-ify' the sound, by adding harmonics in a certain proportion, or 'vinilyze' it by adding multiband compression / filtering / expansion. and a tiny bit of noise, but what would be a way to make it les reveling?
@@d.j.wiendels6572 I built a set of speakers and during the development of them it was always a goal to have them be musical... it was a volleyball match between revealing and musical.. Both my systems have options to use tubes or not, so that part is grooving... and then when I built the crossover and then did a new crossover and crossover design for my regular system that has B&W speakers... in both crossovers I use a bypass cap on the tweeter circuit and bot also have an lpad on the tweeter circuit and I built my lpads with multiple resistors and as such I can change the tweeter volume and or change the bypass cap volume (independently). So if I lower the bypass cap volume it brings the speaker more into the musical realm. I can also swap out capacitors because I built he crossovers with plugs for all the parts... so, changes in the crossover...
I have a McIntosh MA 352 and for bad recordings, I use it's equalizer knobs. I find that bad recordings seem to suffer in the higher frequencies, so I'll just reduce them to a small degree which helps. For good recordings, I simply pass through the equalizer. I remember when CD players first came out and all the recordings were harsh. The stores sold a lot of equalizers to overcome the problem. Today, so much has improved that you seldom see graphic equalizers.
Not all revealing systems make less than stellar recordings sound bad. Some certainly do though so it really is crucial to build a system that can handle all that you like to listen to. I, for example, like symphonic metal and some revealing systems sound terrible with a lot of metal/hard rock in general, but the best systems I've heard busy symphonic metal on were also very resolving high end systems.
The difference for me is like recreation with walking every time the same beautifull clean and sunny road feeling amazed with the same view, flowers and walking every time ( with every track./ record) new unknown surprising, sometime rainy and windy not always clean and not stright road. ( like with cliks, noise and accidental not welcomed sounds which could be eliminated in first case by system which is "filtering" them by serious modification of sound. It i depends on listener attitude. My way is to hear as much as possible, even I recognize that other people may complain for too low level of low or /and high sounds which should/can create nice rich harmonics frames to picture but ultimately may be bigger than painting. .
Excellent answer Paul. Walking on pavement is one of my favourite songs. But funny not too many people I know have even heard of it. Hope you have heard the song. I think it’s a very good early recording
I have several Adele albums, and Paul is correct. The recordings are terrible. It is a shame that the industry is more about making big bucks than good recordings.
My understanding is that Boris finds a redundancy in exotic cables, power lines and power sources. Why try to alter the sound from the way a system is designed? That question is only valid if one believes whether cables and power lines alter the sound on an audio system.
I wholeheartedly agree with your conclusion👍👍 but that said, I have equipment specifically set up here to listen to less than stellar recordings that I own that I like the music of, because I want to maximize my listening enjoyment, period
@@donaldmacdougall1600 yes I do eat oat a lot. that's why I am as strong as a horse. One of the fastest in the swimming pool, even being 64 years old. How about it, do you eat it too? 🙂
The only valid goal in hifi should be *accuracy* ... whatever is on that recording is what you should hear. That way you can judge talent, mixing and mastering on a recording by recording basis...
Low end systems won't reveal as much the difference with quality recordings versus crap. The magic in putting a system together is the SYNERGY you are after. I had a talk at private showing for the DCS VARESE dac with another system owner. He upgraded to try out Dragon cables from Audioquest but felt the system was too revealing and sharp. He mentioned his copper cables from Audioquest sounded better to him. I asked what gear he was running. He was using all solid state stuff. I told him the Dragon silver cables with solid state can induce too much detail. I have Dragon cables but tube amps so my tube amps might be less revealing with a warmer sound but have a nice combo matched with the Dragon cables. You buy all from the same brand you get a certain sound but even then different cables can change that. I think part of the fun myself is mixing and matching different products with brands and connections to produce an amazing sound nobody has really heard before. Now some people get older and just stick with one brand and their experimentation days are over. Personally Magico speakers and all of that and also solid state amps seem lifeless to me. A high end tube amp I just really enjoy a lot. To each their own.
The problem for me with older bad recordings is even if they get rerecorded by the artist at a later date, they then seem to lose something the old bad recording had by the bucketload. A prime example for me would be Dobie Grey's 'Drift Away'. The newer recording is cleaner but just lacks performance credibility and for me sounds soulless by comparison. But even some old recordings that are not as technically perfect as today's best recordings can still give me ample gratification such as Art Garfunkel's 'I shall sing'. Sometimes a recoding just has to live up to my memory of it to be enjoyed at its fullest.
Perfectly said! I love Van Halen, but their last album "A Different Kind of Truth" was so poorly recorded that I just won't listen to it. So, you give it up as Paul said. Better to give up bad sounding audio recordings then to play it anyway and just be miserable.
I toss in a few frozen blueberries and to me it is delicious. I grew up on a farm and my dad was a strong advocate of a healthy breakfast. We ate oatmeal every day growing up followed by some form of eggs and toast. Following that up with physical labor was not a bad way to grow up.
Interesting comment on Adele. Hello is one of my test tracks. On a good system when the backup singers come in it fills the room with sound from every direction, like you are in the middle of a vast hall. But all of 30 sounds pretty rubbish. What are your thoughts on the 25 recording?
The late J. Gordon Holt used to say, and I'm only slightly paraphrasing, "Don't listen to music you like if it doesn't sound good on your system. Listen to music that you may not like but sounds amazing on your system."
Most audiophiles are perfectionists. Explaining the need for highly resolving systems. That perfectionism is in all aspects of their lives, not just audio. Their TV's will always be of a higher quality. Wallmarts latest, greatest sale on a big screen just will not do. In a home entertainment system, the video is just as important as the audio, imho. The arranged marriage between the two is where the rubber meets the road in any of my home systems. Magic always ensues. Poor recordings are what they are, and they are not going away anytime soon. Cost cutting measures will always plague recording studio's when profits are involved. Not at Octave, which is exactly the point.
You nailed it! I have an older 70" Sharp 1080p TV and a mediocre 7.2.4 surround system and I have an ongoing severe case of FOMO. I may become more depressed than I already am if I ever get the chance to experience the "ideal" AV setup.
I like hearing lofi music as it was intended: low fidelity. A revealing sound system will reveal that perfectly. Not complicated, just enjoy the artists intention. Don’t try to fix what’s meant to be broken.
i had a bit of everything over the years, you get used to what ever you got unless it sounds annoying. with revealing systems its the recordings that gets annoying. so then at least you know what to stay away from. i do not support badly recorded stuff.
I don't know if this is the same thing. With my main system I am running very neutral speakers but quite a warm sounding integrated amplifier which just takes the edge off of the sound. Whereas with my headphone system I have a ZMF auteur, which is very neutral (with stock pads), but my Burson Audio X3 Performance dac/amp is very detailed, and that combination at times can become very grating to listen to over a long period.
I find myself listening to my system more than the music. I think that going down this audiophile rabbit hole has ruined music listening for me. I hope I'm wrong- any advice?
Yuuup fully agreeee so many Great songs poorly recorded that I cant listen on m’y System it takes all the beauty of it but sound good in m’y car grrrrr
It is indeed a great question and it always gets back to this one (in my opinion) elephant in the room: Great recordings are mainly bad music (And of course there is always the exception to the rule). But what it comes down to is what is the bulk of music you prefer and and how can we make that sound the best. Or, why would I pay more to have worse sound of the music I like, only because I may or may not have one or two albums that will sound better. If that still is not obvious, how about you get the choice of eating all year less tasty food and in return for that, the thanks giving dinner is promised to be better than when tasting nicer food all year.
Thanks to my experience more than 40 years and many different equipment,I found that too much rebelling is not my sound. I prefer more musical,natural and organic sound with good definition and micro details. My feeling is to get some balance performance for any kind of music. Just to compare with expensive car,I will never spend money for Ferrari,Bugatti or Lamborghini,because you can enjoy only in the circuits. My best car is SUV 4x4 like Audi,Mercedes,Porsche,because I will enjoy in any road condition. This is my personal opinion.
Speaking for myself I tend to prefer a balanced system. Something that has detail enough but not so much that it detracts from the performance itself. To me. a super revealing system does not sound natural, especially those that reveal every nuance and wrinkle that you do not typically hear in the concert hall. Like so many others, I do not just listen to the audiophile catalog and do like the freedom of owning something that is forgiving on less than pristine recordings.
This guy from Croatia has a point here: not everything a musician is playing is aimed to be heard … sometimes, esp in „groovy music“, you want some sort of washed out tones/ percussive noises
Disagree. Some of the Grooviest of music... is from the Disco era... like from the Band: Earth Wind and Fire, KC and the Sunshine Band, and or Kool and the Gang. Earth Wind and Fire has some AMAZINGLY detailed tracks... and with so many instruments and vocals all playing at the same time... if your speakers have even the slightest of Micro-Distortions... some of those instrumental details, and vocals... will Blend into each other, losing their Individual Separations. Thus, you will lose both musical details, and 3d positional details... if you have equipment that cant keep up with the music's demands. Now... those tracks sound so good... that you can play them on almost anything, and still enjoy them. But when you hear them played on a higher end set of speakers... its Magic on a whole other level. Especially when you Crank up the volume levels... where you would better hear either Distortions, or even Greater details + dynamics.
Washed out wasn‘t quite correct. What I meant was the for exapmple the playing of so called dead notes … you need to feel that they‘re there but you should not be able hear each very quiet note played
Is the ultimate in revealing to get studio monitors like the recording engineers have then?? I dont, but it seems like thats what this is implying. I have a couple of systems and in the vintage one i use dbx expander for vinyl, and some eq when i want....needed or not!
It makes me wonder why an artist would allow a poorly produced recording of their music to be released. I’m sure a big name such as Adele would be able to insist on quality control. Most of Springsteen lps sound compressed as well. I have some regular pressings from Bruce Cockburn, Joni Mitchell and Zappa that sound just great. Perhaps they had more interest in making sure their fans got their moneys worth.
This is why my entire system is roughly $3k or less. There is no reason for me to spend $10K on a system. I will always just be unhappy with most recordings
Paul, will PS Audio ever design a preamp with switchable outputs like the Freya+, so the listener can select different types of sound from their systems?
It doesn't need to do that. Listen to the music not the recording, your gear, the room or your crying neighbours... Some of the best music I have is really badly recorded, but that doesn't stop me from enjoying it.
I agree that lesser revealing gear can be somewhat enjoyable because you can play almost anything and be pretty content with what your hearing. But it's important to know that the reason everything sounds much the same is due to the smearing that glazes over everything you hear. When you lift that glaze, you get more information retrieval and less smearing that ultimately highlights the good and bad to a greater extent. As long as you're happy with the tradeoff of weeding out badly recorded music you will be rewarded with the better recorded stuff. It's funny until I got to a certain standard of transparency there was one song that had a metronome right in the background that was only audible with the more revealing setup. I personally enjoy the extra detail but I can understand that some will be content with less.
Have a system that's too revealing ? Just add an Equalizer...(and/or a handful of band-pass filters with random settings ) That will make it less revealing.
You can have your cake and eat it too it's just a question of system synergy. A tube pre amp can smooth an over revealing system but tube degradation is a pain. I achieve similar results with an R2R DAC for something more musical and forgiving of poor recordings as they are not so clinical sounding as many delta sigma DACs that strive for ultimate specification.
I enjoy your show. No bs and stuff. I wonder this. I agree that a tube preamp and ss power amp is the poop. But if preamp tubes are microphonic explaining the magic dont you think that power tubes may also be microphonic? Maybe a tube pre and tube power may double the fun. Just curious , if anybody still reads these
It’s kind of like asking why have a 4K TV when you only own a Blu-ray player. It’s the field of dreams; if you build it, they will come. Without HiFi equipment, nobody would ever bother to make good recordings. 🎉
Sorry, it won't. If you have 4K tv and watch full HD video, there is process of upscaling that produce arteficial pixels and not making picture better. With arteficial pixels image quality is actually decreasing at pixel level.
Adele's recordings are far from the worst - though I do think Paul might be slightly infatuated with her. Trying listening to most 1970's and 80's rock and pop albums. Flash back to AM radio....
Absolutely! I had an antique Silvertone AM/FM tube mono radio/record player console and it sounded just like it was supposed to while playing AM radio and vintage music. I kick myself for junking it. Just plain stupid I am!
A system must be revealing across the entire frequency range. When one part is accentuated at the cost of the rest, that part is too revealing because it masks the other parts of the range .
I cannot understate the importance of a great recording. For many years I listened to a wonderful artist, purchased many CDs during this period and enjoyed them. After watching them live with no less than 12 live musicians on stage (2 drummers) I could no longer listen to the CDs as my enjoyment had been destroyed - due to the lack of energy, dynamism and over production in the recordings. They were clearly mastered for playback on a car sound system; and not a good one or over the radio. I have recently turned more towards classical music and live recordings which are a mixed bag. Tinned carrots with never be the same as fresh ones pulled from the garden 🪴 sorry 😞
I poorly recorded master recording will only put out poor sound no matter the gear you play it on. Let’s blame the recording engineer and where and how the recording was pressed or the CD was burned not the systems it’s played on. A great recording even makes radio shack gear sound good.
There is so much different sounds. Some recordings sounds totally awful whatever sound equipment it is played on. Professional artists sounds good on most equipment, ten times better with expensive stereos.
Question: Is there such a thing as a "perfect" recording? Was the gear used to record the session perfect, was the mixing gear and engineer perfect, etc....? Surely, all recording, like everything else, is made to a "price point". In the 70's and 80's it has been said that a few bands only graded their albums before release in their dang cars. To me most popular music is just noise used to collect money from foolish teenagers. It's sad how I have had to give up on most my former favorite 80's music. How nice would it be to have a certified recording to measure our "rooms" against?
I think a good analogy is a guy that's very happy with the looks of his wife or girlfriend until he goes out and gets an expensive pair of glasses that completely corrects his vision and now he realizes she's not near as pretty as he thought she was.. So now he's wondering whether it was really worth spending all that money on those new expensive eyeglasses.
"Too revealing" just means your speakers have bumps in either the midrange and/or the treble. Most recordings will sound okay to great on speakers with a linear frequency response. And of course, sometimes they will 'enhance' the sound quality during remastering and that is not always for the better (Genesis CDs).
Personally I don't enjoy equipment that makes everything sound the same . I need those times when a great recording of beautiful music brings tears to my eyes or a lump in my throat .
It doesn't take that much to have 2 or 3 sources for 1 system. For instance, a CD player analog out to an integrated amp, a 2nd CD player to good DAC, and a streamer, all hooked up to the same amp. Some things will sound better on one or another, and you don't have to give anything up. Horses for courses.
Quality over quantity. There's a reason lots of records are relegated to the bargain bin. Quality things cost more to make. If quality is not your priority then you can go to thrift shops and grab dozens of records for a few bucks and have fun that way. Really depends on the consumer.
I agree with Paul. If you listen to the Adele on your clock radio, it’s probably going to sound the same as “Gaucho”. And if that’s what makes your toe tap, great! You’ve saved a TON of dough. But it doesn’t do anything for me. So I’ll take my chances with Adele and also get to listen to a great record and be mesmerized. But, on the flip side, be out a few thousand bucks. Horses for courses.
I'm on the side of revealing as much as possible in a way that is natural as the recordings will allow.If the recordings aren't good enough,we shouldn't lower system resolution just to be kind to them.Let the recordings catch up,or fall behind if they're not good enough. Many of us can still enjoy music even when the recordings are poor anyway. Just have to live with them,i feel.
I find that a revealing system makes distortion clearer, making it easier to tolerate.
Yeah I’m in the same boat with you there in that I prefer resolution and neutrality above all. I think the issue is that a lot of the most resolving systems don’t preserve dynamics and for some audiophiles that’s a dealbreaker. It’s a dealbreaker for Paul for sure. I myself will sacrifice dynamics for maximum detail. I am of course referring to a Martin Logan system. At some point a well set up super resolving system will not make recordings sound worse but not sure if that’s true for all loudspeaker designs.
@michaeldina1103 Hi.I for one feel that the more we resolve,the more we can extract from the original performance and recover what the musicians played in the first place,which is surely the entire point with high fidelity. Why anyone would want to deliberately make a system "warm",or whatever is all somewhat alien and going against that objective, I feel. To each their own,of course,but if that objective is lost,what are we striving for? Martin Logan are good speakers. Heard a few from them.
I think that making "resolution" more important than the music does a great disservice to that music. Lesser performances with higher recording quality, is simply not an option. In the popular music genre, only playing the highest fidelity recordings means that you have to give up many important artists. In the classical music genre, the tradeoff is even worse. For my ears, every performance of let's say Beethovens 6th symphony is musically different and I am more than willing to put up with technical compromise before musical compromise. I feel sorry for the gearheads that are willing to give up important musical performances because of their lack of music appreciation. Sure, Audiophile can mean gearhead, but to me that is not "audiophile" (lover of music) rather technophile (lover of technology), I have more than one system and can get "the most" out of most recordings - at least so much that I never have the urge to give up on the music.
@ Well said! I use digital and vinyl and having those options helps me to offset that urge to impose that unrealistic expectation onto music that doesn’t deserve that judgment. This way I can enjoy all music that I enjoy without the inner audiophile getting in the way.
Some high performance cars are so stiff and unforgiving that they’re best not driven on poor roads. Same thing.
100% true.
This is the answer. ❤
Maybe there should be LoFi button to push when you are playing bad recordings, LOL.
or a skip button
This is likely why some prefer Tube amps.. as they slightly change the sound signature. The other option, is to have a 2nd pair of speakers / headphones, that have less Fidelity.
Thing is... I have rarely found music that I listen too... that doesnt sound better, with Audiophile grade speakers. The only time that happened, was when I was using very high end headphones, and a few very low quality MP3 files. I just found better versions of the same music, and the problem was solved.
@@banginghats2 For me that Lofi button is vinyl. Whenever I hear a recording through my DAC/ digital transport that sounds like it’s missing something. I just try to get it on vinyl. It loses resolution, but it gains something spiritual.
I use an old R2R DAC for music I like which is not mastered for audiophile systems.
@@DeMorcan That’s fascinating! I’ve never heard a stand-alone R2R DAC. I’ve probably heard old school multi-bit through my dad’s old CD player. I wonder if I should try that? I know Fiio just came out with an inexpensive R2R. Well food for thought for me I guess. I currently use an ESS DAC that sounds good and smooth to me but I don’t have much reference.
Will you share the make/model of old R2R you use?
Edit: Adding the question at the end.
Go to a live classical concert in a good hall (with no mic of course). And then compare to your system. You cannot hear the very little details. You won’t hear the bow on the string the same way it is presented on some revealing system. Having a too revealing system can be like looking to a painted masterpiece with a microscope…
To an extent that’s very dependent on the size of the hall/room and distance from the players, plus, maybe the most critical aspect, is it full orchestral or chamber music? I’m lucky enough to live near a music performance venue relatively new so the halls were designed from scratch by acoustic engineers and it is quite possible to hear very fine nuances of the performers, but of course recordings allow much different microphone placements to what any member of the audience can achieve with their ears. One thing missing from recordings ( unless live) are the coughs, usually perfectly timed to coincide with the quietest most sensitive parts of the music. A friend of mine though really interested in classical had never been to a live performance, I persuaded him to come with me to listen to Hayden’s Nelson Mass, in a church, I asked him, afterwards what he thought- he replied, “ I like my hifi better.”
@@russellbaston974 Yes, hifi system can be a more pleasing experience, but I was just saying that the quest for most details as possible in a hifi is an audiophile’s maniac habit, not a quest for realism. I personally have 2 hifi setup; one very revealing for work in my professional studio (Buchardt A10) and one cheaper and less revealing in my living room ( Lintons with class A amp and mojo2). The Lintons are more like in hall realism for classical music.
@@russellbaston974 You are correct, sir.
Dear Paul,
Thank you for including my question into your videos that I find very educative and informative.
However, 😊I think you missed my point.
My original question had certain intro trying to point out how (almost) all other electronics manufacturers are trying to make products with performacne consistent as much as possible without influence of any outer factors like cables, mains etc.
My examples as an ortho surgeon are CT and MRI.
Imagine that MRI needs "better cable" or power regenerator to deliver better images!🤔 And those devices need huge amount of power to work.
Watching one of your other videos with topic about "what is definition of revealing system" you explained that those systems can be influenced with changing of cables, using power regenerator and other audiophile tweaks that allows user to gain better performance and that your tendency in PS audio is to produce such products.
Therefore I wasn't reffering to better reproduction or more details, but on consistency and sort of "brand" or "desinger's sound signature" that can be resistant to any influence including "fly sitting on my preamp" as a metaphoric way to express what I wanted to point out. If I like that signature, I would buy that product, If I don't I would look elsewhere.
I know how producing such devices would "kill" lots of other products and lots of snake oil on the market, most likey would take joy out of being in this hobby, but I wanted to hear proper explanation.
Even I was very pleased to hear my (half of) question and my name in your video, I didn't get answer I was hoping for.
Best regards
Boris
This video makes it seems like there's a tradeoff. My experience thus far (JBL s4700 speakers) is that everything I do that makes the sound more natural with good recordings also makes bad recordings sound less bad. It's the overall relaxed feeling of the sound that helps everything, and you get that by improving the quality of all components in the system.
That can happen too. I've a number of songs that I once judged to be mediocre that magically got way better when I DIY upgraded my speakers. It's not just "confirmation bias"... I was actually hearing things in the recordings that I had never heard before.
Unfortunately that also means I was hearing bad stuff in recordings I'd never noticed before... like the piano keyboard being backwards or the drum kit magically shifting from audience to stage perspective ... all kinds of little flaws.
(But in fairness, I did find some of those flaws to be outright hilarious.)
@@Douglas_Blake Quick fix for those stage perspective drum recordings. Picture yourself sitting in the drummers seat, rear center stage looking out at the band. On live recordings the audience noise sounds much more natural in this perspective also.
@@slode1693
Naaa ... I've been there, doesn't sound the same.
Actually you'd be amazed how much stuff is mixed from stage perspective. The most laughable is in videos when someone is at a keyboard ... they reach left the sound comes out to the right.
@@Douglas_Blake I hear you. The one that really pisses me off is when there are multiple instruments with the players singing parts and their voices are mixed to a different location than the instrument they're playing. Nickel Creek is really bad with this. They always mix the instruments the same, but the voices rarely match and change from song to song or even part. Love their music but all I can picture when I close my eyes is people with long rubbery necks moving their heads left and right.
@@slode1693
LOL .... Yep!
It's a mixing and mastering error, the result of carelessness.
Revealing vs. forgiving can be added to the list of other audiophile controversies: Analog vs. digital, tubes vs. solid state, best speaker types, etc.
In my world of growing up in the 60's and 70's I have tailored my 70's system to reproduce the music from that era so that it sounds great to me. I also enjoy finding new music and I find that music recorded or remastered in todays world also sounds very nice on my 70's system. Bottom line for me is I put together a nice 70's system that reproduces music that sounds great to me and I did not have to pay 5 figures to get it. Still enjoy Paul explaining all this technical stuff though 🙂
Listen from another room, I do it all the time (have music on while doing other things), I sit down 'properly' when I want to listen more critically. 😄
It is all about air. You couldn't hear a thing without air. Now, whether that air is excited by electrons moving matter that in turn pushes air or excited by 'live' acoustic vibration, it is still about air pressure on our tympanic membrane. There was a time when there was no choice but to listen to "live" source air pressure. Now, we have a choice. Choose the electron source and you will always have to accept compromise. Playing the game of trying to match live source sound with electron-produced sound is just that. . . a game. Listen to music live or listen to it through electronic means while accepting that the product of electronic sound will never be the same as the "real thing."
Agreed. I also think there is nothing wrong with enjoying listening to your system as it's own thing. The act of studio recording, mastering and replay in many cases creates a sound that intentionally cannot be reproduced at a live event.
@@user-od9iz9cv1w You might even say that "creating" electronic sound is an art form in and of itself. It is when you try and match it to "live" sound that it becomes a problem. But note that some of the greatest pianists that ever lived recorded their playing when electronic sound reproduction was very primitive compared to today. Listening to their playing embedded in the fog and noise of those early recordings and deciphering the beauty and expression of those keyboard artists has become a phenomenon that would seem inauthentic if it had been translated into a modern recording product. Somehow the imperfections make it more real.
@@davidemach1613 Well said!
In assembling my systems, part of my calculus is finding that elusive balance between detail and musicality.
I think there is a deeper point in the person’s question. Many hifi systems want to reveal more than there is in live music. As if a microscopic view of a painting would be better than the painting. I am often struck at how non-revealing live music is. And I don’t think hifi companies realize it. Just my take. But great video as usual.
I don’t think that’s the point at all. Most recorded music isn’t intended to be the same as live music. It’s performed, edited, mixed, and mastered to sound a certain way that satisfies the artist’s and producer’s vision for that record. That includes lots of techniques that can’t be reproduced live. What a revealing system does, for me anyway, is put the artist performing that record right in the room with me. Even though a lot of what I’m hearing never really could be performed live. To me, that level of intimacy with the music is enjoyable. To someone else, it might be a waste of a few thousand bucks. That’s why I never bag on anybody’s gear or setup. If it gives you joy listening to music you like, it’s a great system. Period.
@ what kind of music are you thinking of?
First, I agree with Paul's take on revealing audio playback.
But I did not hear this in the question posed. I think the question relates to embracing the sound of a system as delivered vs obsessing over tweaking it using cables or other tweaks that are not faithful to the designer's vision for what the sound signature should be.
My answer is if you are happy with the system enjoy it out of the box. If you like to experiment knock yourself out, but have specific objectives before making purchases as it can become a consumer obsession.
I think you understood better the viewers question.
And that was what I asked Paul. You got it right.
i couldn't agree more. don't you wonder why mfg's of high end speakers don't require you to use 10k speaker cables to get the most out of their speakers? or include a disclaimer that anyone over 50 probably won't be able to enjoy the full capabilities of our speakers. some day i would like to hear music i listen to in the perfect room on the perfect system just to hear what i'm missing. on second thought that might not be such a good idea because i think i'm happy with what i have.
In the '70s I bought a second hand tube amp, and the treble stung like hell but was always fun to hear. Even when the treble was full up, with WAY too much sting, but still sounded great. Subjectively went right up there in high frequency, but wasn't fatiguing, like the best headphones treble on steroids. Maybe some speakers do that too. I build speakers and I can make really scratchy treble or silky treble by switching out a different crossover component. And in both cases, it's subjectively just as bright, but one sounds better. This type of tweaking only works with high treble content recordings, not with straight out distortion. You can have stinging treble that sounds good (even when it's wrong)...thanks to that valve amp that gave me the inspiration to keep that mind when I build my speakers.
I always find it interesting to hear a reviewer talk about their very expensive very "detailed" speakers. To then have them occasionally admit they can not listen to them very long at concert levels or they get fatigue when they compare them to some with less "detail". You've mentioned this about one of their go to "detailed" brands.
But that does not mean there are not good resolving speakers that are not excessive. And unfortunately yes these will still show the difference between the quality of the sources. It just that the good stuff won't be annoying as well!
Here comes loudnesss correction. In my system I applied and it is constant challenge to match loudness with volume (specialy when I care for neighbours and listen silently) - every growth of volume needs less loudness characteristic - I already got used to it so thatI can't bear too "deep" sounding or too "lifted". Almost always adjustment is not accurate according to room requirements and/or source level but eventualy I turn knobs and get the neutral detail. It is engaging and a bit annoying and I think this is one of reasons why it is not offered
@@Mikexception Yes the human auditory system shows less sensitivity to lows and highs as the overall volume is lowered. That to have the balance across the bandwidth at lower volumes could be corrected by a "Loudness Contour". Which used to be included with receivers and integrated back in the day for that reason. Typically calibrated to Fletcher-Munson curves of equal-loudness contours for the human ear. Some of the better units even had adjustments to calibrate the curves for different speaker efficiencies.
If possible, I think having two systems work well with the question of «too revealing » and/or « not revealing enough». I’ve got a small valve amplifier and some sweet standmount speakers in a small room where I sit and listen to many enjoyable, but not well recorded albums. I don’t want to have it as my reference system, but it’s great to listen to when I’m just into something more relaxed listening.
Great music poorly recorded is the perfect reason to have two audio systems. For casual listening, good songs can be enjoyed on something basic and convenient like Sonos. Much like being in a car and grooving out to your favourite tunes.
Totally agree!!! However, we eat oatmeal every day. (E.g., car stereo, Sonos, etc…)
Another analogy is having a race car and a daily driver. No one really wants to drive a drag strip car on the highway besides me.
Lol! 😂 You’ll probably looking for comfort on those daily commutes but when the weekend comes, man o man watch out. “No headers”
Same premise with hifi. When you have time to listen; let’s make it an experience. 😊
That's bs, a good system should accommodate both
No, if the system is good it should handle it all. If a recording is bad, then It's bad. Can still enjoy it🙈
Here's my take. Good audio, highly resolving audio, allows one to now seek out those better recordings with a curiosity that may not have been there before. Because, it's just not the music, but rather, the sound of the music that captures us, the beauty of the sound of music.
Indeed.
But, ulitmately even on mid-fi or chi-fi systems it is the quality of the recording that makes or breaks the sound of your system. I would not want some "house sound" from a company to get in the way of that. I want to hear the music on my recordings, not the 2khz dip in my speakers or the rising 6khz response of a DAC.
That given ... it is not my system's responsibility to make music sound good. That is the job of the the mixing and mastering engineers who made the recording. And right about now I figure most of them are far better suited to driving trains.
@@Douglas_Blake I agree, well done recordings is where it starts, however, playing that recording through an 70's era transistor radio is where it ends.......badly.
@@PhotographyInFlight4183
My entire love of music and a good chunk of my interest in electronics was sparked by a "70s era transistor radio". Back then I didn't know or care about sound quality or frequency response and power... I just enjoyed the music itself.
@@Douglas_Blake Same here. Enjoy.
@@PhotographyInFlight4183
Happy listening!
I read a review where the reviewer said he could hear (for the first time) a truck driving by the recording studio on his new 200k speakers.
"Better" is subjective.
I’m not going to go into all the details of my stereo rig, but I will discuss my amp and preamp.
My amp, a McIntosh MC275 MkV (tube rolled to have slightly less tubey sound and have faster bass). My preamp, a Schiit Audio Freya+.
When I want my rig to be revealing, I select passive or differential buffer output gain on my Freya+. When I want my rig to be less revealing, I select differential tube gain.
I almost always select differential tube gain on my Freya+, the combination of the Freya+ in that mode and my tube rolled MC275 gives me superb imaging and soundstage, as well as some of the most beautiful music I’ve ever heard.
That's why I will never have such a higher end system. The music is more important to me. Even with my modest system, the differences between the recordings are very noticeable.
Not willing to hear perfect reproduction of music I hate (or at least does NOTHING for me) rather than music I love produced very nicely, but not perfectly. End of story.
This is why we chose the great recordings , and why they became so popular . And why they are in everyone’s collections.
PS Audio could introduce the "BlurryLens (tm)" to mask bad recordings.
The view is never better through frosted glass. High resolution systems reveal more and bring the music closer to the recorded performance. There it is Paul, "in ~20 words or less."
Good point! I will rather have a revealing system and fully enjoy great recordings, even though I miss a lot of tunes. Less great recordings does not deserve my rig :) If you have a mediocre rig everything sound just okey... What´s the fun in that. Meh...
We pay the money to hear everything!
The question is this: Is there such a thing as a system being too revealing, or are the issues we notice simply the result of bad recordings?
It's akin to watching classic movies in 4K. While the enhanced resolution can bring stunning clarity, it can also reveal unintended details-like skin imperfections or duct tape holding a costume together-that detract from the intended experience.
That's a very good example. It's like going back to DVD's because you don't like seeing film grain on Blu-Rays. Why not? It's an integral part of the material you're enjoying. Same on old recordings, with good masterings you get to hear tape hiss and maybe some defects in the tape that you never noticed before
Try watching a laserdisc on a modern flat screen. How they went from the best of the best to something unimaginably bad.
@ZeusTheTornado I personally enjoy hearing the subtle imperfections in music-a whisper in the background, a tap you never noticed before, or even the gentle hiss of tape. Live performances are rarely flawless; amplification can be off, your seat might not offer the best acoustics, or the venue itself might not be ideal for music. True perfection in sound is rare, no matter how often hi-fi aficionados claim otherwise. It's those little imperfections that make the experience unique and authentic.
Back in the early 2000s, when the loudness war was in full swing and CDs were still a thing, almost half of the service calls I did were "bad sound" and almost every one of them magically cleared up as soon as I put one of my test disks into the system.
The "rule" is... If one or two recordings sound bad, get better recorcings. Don't mess with your equipment until they all sound bad.
Paul, foo foo up that oatmeal. Put in some apple chunks and cinnamon. Granola and cranberries or raisins. Blueberries or strawberries. Throw in a few nuts. Live in up and have fun. You’re not too old for change
What's not "revealing" enough is Paul. He's not revealing his profit margin.
Oatmeal + a little raw sugar + cinnamon is fantastic Paul. :-P
I am finding this out more and more . There is so much great music that I will not listen to with current system .
I can enjoy every tyoe of recording at any volume on my revealing system. Every tune is consistently transparent and engaging, How? 1. Reduce background noise of the system with power filtering, grounding, physical isolation of all components, EMI/FRI shielded cables with ferrite rings. 2. Warm leaning Marantz Class AB amp with impressive bass 3. Dynaudio speakers built to Flechter-Munson curve paired with a Dynaudio subwoofer.
I think the best is to have each style available in the same system via a simple option in either the preamp or the crossover. Revealing vs musicality.
i can think of a way to 'tube-ify' the sound, by adding harmonics in a certain proportion, or 'vinilyze' it by adding multiband compression / filtering / expansion. and a tiny bit of noise, but what would be a way to make it les reveling?
@@d.j.wiendels6572 I built a set of speakers and during the development of them it was always a goal to have them be musical... it was a volleyball match between revealing and musical.. Both my systems have options to use tubes or not, so that part is grooving... and then when I built the crossover and then did a new crossover and crossover design for my regular system that has B&W speakers... in both crossovers I use a bypass cap on the tweeter circuit and bot also have an lpad on the tweeter circuit and I built my lpads with multiple resistors and as such I can change the tweeter volume and or change the bypass cap volume (independently). So if I lower the bypass cap volume it brings the speaker more into the musical realm. I can also swap out capacitors because I built he crossovers with plugs for all the parts... so, changes in the crossover...
I have a McIntosh MA 352 and for bad recordings, I use it's equalizer knobs. I find that bad recordings seem to suffer in the higher frequencies, so I'll just reduce them to a small degree which helps. For good recordings, I simply pass through the equalizer. I remember when CD players first came out and all the recordings were harsh. The stores sold a lot of equalizers to overcome the problem. Today, so much has improved that you seldom see graphic equalizers.
Not all revealing systems make less than stellar recordings sound bad. Some certainly do though so it really is crucial to build a system that can handle all that you like to listen to. I, for example, like symphonic metal and some revealing systems sound terrible with a lot of metal/hard rock in general, but the best systems I've heard busy symphonic metal on were also very resolving high end systems.
The difference for me is like recreation with walking every time the same beautifull clean and sunny road feeling amazed with the same view, flowers and walking every time ( with every track./ record) new unknown surprising, sometime rainy and windy not always clean and not stright road. ( like with cliks, noise and accidental not welcomed sounds which could be eliminated in first case by system which is "filtering" them by serious modification of sound.
It i depends on listener attitude. My way is to hear as much as possible, even I recognize that other people may complain for too low level of low or /and high sounds which should/can create nice rich harmonics frames to picture but ultimately may be bigger than painting. .
Errmm, the warehouse in the thumbnail - is it for storing post holes ?
My dad often hauled post holes and dispatcher brains. hahaha!
🖤striped paint, left handed wrenches, long waits & value for money goods..
Excellent answer Paul. Walking on pavement is one of my favourite songs. But funny not too many people I know have even heard of it. Hope you have heard the song. I think it’s a very good early recording
I have several Adele albums, and Paul is correct. The recordings are terrible.
It is a shame that the industry is more about making big bucks than good recordings.
My understanding is that Boris finds a redundancy in exotic cables, power lines and power sources. Why try to alter the sound from the way a system is designed? That question is only valid if one believes whether cables and power lines alter the sound on an audio system.
Touche! That was my question.👍
I wholeheartedly agree with your conclusion👍👍
but that said,
I have equipment specifically set up here to listen to less than stellar recordings that I own that I like the music of, because I want to maximize my listening enjoyment, period
Hope you get a chance to hear Mezzo. Just awesome. His voice is amazing
The comparison with oatmeal I don't see! 🙂
That’s because you ate too much oatmeal 😅
@@donaldmacdougall1600 yes I do eat oat a lot. that's why I am as strong as a horse. One of the fastest in the swimming pool, even being 64 years old. How about it, do you eat it too? 🙂
Nothing a little EQ cant handle.
The only valid goal in hifi should be *accuracy* ... whatever is on that recording is what you should hear. That way you can judge talent, mixing and mastering on a recording by recording basis...
Fully agree.
Low end systems won't reveal as much the difference with quality recordings versus crap. The magic in putting a system together is the SYNERGY you are after. I had a talk at private showing for the DCS VARESE dac with another system owner. He upgraded to try out Dragon cables from Audioquest but felt the system was too revealing and sharp. He mentioned his copper cables from Audioquest sounded better to him. I asked what gear he was running. He was using all solid state stuff. I told him the Dragon silver cables with solid state can induce too much detail. I have Dragon cables but tube amps so my tube amps might be less revealing with a warmer sound but have a nice combo matched with the Dragon cables. You buy all from the same brand you get a certain sound but even then different cables can change that. I think part of the fun myself is mixing and matching different products with brands and connections to produce an amazing sound nobody has really heard before. Now some people get older and just stick with one brand and their experimentation days are over. Personally Magico speakers and all of that and also solid state amps seem lifeless to me. A high end tube amp I just really enjoy a lot. To each their own.
The problem for me with older bad recordings is even if they get rerecorded by the artist at a later date, they then seem to lose something the old bad recording had by the bucketload. A prime example for me would be Dobie Grey's 'Drift Away'. The newer recording is cleaner but just lacks performance credibility and for me sounds soulless by comparison.
But even some old recordings that are not as technically perfect as today's best recordings can still give me ample gratification such as Art Garfunkel's 'I shall sing'. Sometimes a recoding just has to live up to my memory of it to be enjoyed at its fullest.
Perfectly said! I love Van Halen, but their last album "A Different Kind of Truth" was so poorly recorded that I just won't listen to it. So, you give it up as Paul said. Better to give up bad sounding audio recordings then to play it anyway and just be miserable.
We all have different goals on our journey 🎶😊 we have to pick the flaws that we’re willing to live with
It’s very easy to make oatmeal delicious (and even healthier) just by adding a few good ingredients.
Paul, you need a better analogy.
I toss in a few frozen blueberries and to me it is delicious. I grew up on a farm and my dad was a strong advocate of a healthy breakfast. We ate oatmeal every day growing up followed by some form of eggs and toast. Following that up with physical labor was not a bad way to grow up.
Interesting comment on Adele. Hello is one of my test tracks. On a good system when the backup singers come in it fills the room with sound from every direction, like you are in the middle of a vast hall. But all of 30 sounds pretty rubbish. What are your thoughts on the 25 recording?
The late J. Gordon Holt used to say, and I'm only slightly paraphrasing, "Don't listen to music you like if it doesn't sound good on your system. Listen to music that you may not like but sounds amazing on your system."
Hey Paul, those warehouse shelves need a max weight on them. It'll save you millions if a shelf ever fails. And they do. Take care, all the best
Most audiophiles are perfectionists. Explaining the need for highly resolving systems. That perfectionism is in all aspects of their lives, not just audio. Their TV's will always be of a higher quality. Wallmarts latest, greatest sale on a big screen just will not do. In a home entertainment system, the video is just as important as the audio, imho. The arranged marriage between the two is where the rubber meets the road in any of my home systems. Magic always ensues. Poor recordings are what they are, and they are not going away anytime soon. Cost cutting measures will always plague recording studio's when profits are involved. Not at Octave, which is exactly the point.
You nailed it! I have an older 70" Sharp 1080p TV and a mediocre 7.2.4 surround system and I have an ongoing severe case of FOMO. I may become more depressed than I already am if I ever get the chance to experience the "ideal" AV setup.
As an doctor of medicine I would call it OCD, not perfectionism.
I like hearing lofi music as it was intended: low fidelity. A revealing sound system will reveal that perfectly. Not complicated, just enjoy the artists intention. Don’t try to fix what’s meant to be broken.
i had a bit of everything over the years, you get used to what ever you got unless it sounds annoying.
with revealing systems its the recordings that gets annoying. so then at least you know what to stay away from. i do not support badly recorded stuff.
I don't know if this is the same thing. With my main system I am running very neutral speakers but quite a warm sounding integrated amplifier which just takes the edge off of the sound. Whereas with my headphone system I have a ZMF auteur, which is very neutral (with stock pads), but my Burson Audio X3 Performance dac/amp is very detailed, and that combination at times can become very grating to listen to over a long period.
Oatmeal and maple syrup is awesome
This is why I have two systems. One for good and one for the bad recordings…s
I find myself listening to my system more than the music. I think that going down this audiophile rabbit hole has ruined music listening for me. I hope I'm wrong- any advice?
If the system sounds to youre satisfaction you enjoy the music .
There is great music, and there are great recordings, sadly the two don't always meet, I think if you can't have both then I prefer great music.
Yuuup fully agreeee so many Great songs poorly recorded that I cant listen on m’y System it takes all the beauty of it but sound good in m’y car grrrrr
It is indeed a great question and it always gets back to this one (in my opinion) elephant in the room: Great recordings are mainly bad music (And of course there is always the exception to the rule). But what it comes down to is what is the bulk of music you prefer and and how can we make that sound the best. Or, why would I pay more to have worse sound of the music I like, only because I may or may not have one or two albums that will sound better. If that still is not obvious, how about you get the choice of eating all year less tasty food and in return for that, the thanks giving dinner is promised to be better than when tasting nicer food all year.
Thanks to my experience more than 40 years and many different equipment,I found that too much rebelling is not my sound. I prefer more musical,natural and organic sound with good definition and micro details. My feeling is to get some balance performance for any kind of music. Just to compare with expensive car,I will never spend money for Ferrari,Bugatti or Lamborghini,because you can enjoy only in the circuits. My best car is SUV 4x4 like Audi,Mercedes,Porsche,because I will enjoy in any road condition. This is my personal opinion.
Great answer!
Speaking for myself I tend to prefer a balanced system. Something that has detail enough but not so much that it detracts from the performance itself. To me. a super revealing system does not sound natural, especially those that reveal every nuance and wrinkle that you do not typically hear in the concert hall. Like so many others, I do not just listen to the audiophile catalog and do like the freedom of owning something that is forgiving on less than pristine recordings.
It definitely "sounds" empty!😂😂
This guy from Croatia has a point here: not everything a musician is playing is aimed to be heard … sometimes, esp in „groovy music“, you want some sort of washed out tones/ percussive noises
Disagree. Some of the Grooviest of music... is from the Disco era... like from the Band: Earth Wind and Fire, KC and the Sunshine Band, and or Kool and the Gang. Earth Wind and Fire has some AMAZINGLY detailed tracks... and with so many instruments and vocals all playing at the same time... if your speakers have even the slightest of Micro-Distortions... some of those instrumental details, and vocals... will Blend into each other, losing their Individual Separations.
Thus, you will lose both musical details, and 3d positional details... if you have equipment that cant keep up with the music's demands.
Now... those tracks sound so good... that you can play them on almost anything, and still enjoy them. But when you hear them played on a higher end set of speakers... its Magic on a whole other level. Especially when you Crank up the volume levels... where you would better hear either Distortions, or even Greater details + dynamics.
Washed out wasn‘t quite correct. What I meant was the for exapmple the playing of so called dead notes … you need to feel that they‘re there but you should not be able hear each very quiet note played
Is the ultimate in revealing to get studio monitors like the recording engineers have then?? I dont, but it seems like thats what this is implying. I have a couple of systems and in the vintage one i use dbx expander for vinyl, and some eq when i want....needed or not!
It makes me wonder why an artist would allow a poorly produced recording of their music to be released. I’m sure a big name such as Adele would be able to insist on quality control. Most of Springsteen lps sound compressed as well.
I have some regular pressings from Bruce Cockburn, Joni Mitchell and Zappa that sound just great. Perhaps they had more interest in making sure their fans got their moneys worth.
This is why my entire system is roughly $3k or less. There is no reason for me to spend $10K on a system. I will always just be unhappy with most recordings
Paul, will PS Audio ever design a preamp with switchable outputs like the Freya+, so the listener can select different types of sound from their systems?
Only steel cut oats are nutritious; regular oat meal is crap.
I agree. Too bad it limits our listening to about 0.01% of music. 😅
It doesn't need to do that. Listen to the music not the recording, your gear, the room or your crying neighbours... Some of the best music I have is really badly recorded, but that doesn't stop me from enjoying it.
I agree that lesser revealing gear can be somewhat enjoyable because you can play almost anything and be pretty content with what your hearing. But it's important to know that the reason everything sounds much the same is due to the smearing that glazes over everything you hear. When you lift that glaze, you get more information retrieval and less smearing that ultimately highlights the good and bad to a greater extent. As long as you're happy with the tradeoff of weeding out badly recorded music you will be rewarded with the better recorded stuff. It's funny until I got to a certain standard of transparency there was one song that had a metronome right in the background that was only audible with the more revealing setup. I personally enjoy the extra detail but I can understand that some will be content with less.
Have a system that's too revealing ?
Just add an Equalizer...(and/or a handful of band-pass filters with random settings )
That will make it less revealing.
You can have your cake and eat it too it's just a question of system synergy. A tube pre amp can smooth an over revealing system but tube degradation is a pain. I achieve similar results with an R2R DAC for something more musical and forgiving of poor recordings as they are not so clinical sounding as many delta sigma DACs that strive for ultimate specification.
Paul, that wasn't a good analogy, because oatmeal isn't as good for you as one might think!😉
I enjoy your show. No bs and stuff. I wonder this. I agree that a tube preamp and ss power amp is the poop. But if preamp tubes are microphonic explaining the magic dont you think that power tubes may also be microphonic? Maybe a tube pre and tube power may double the fun. Just curious , if anybody still reads these
you right as usal ;)
It’s kind of like asking why have a 4K TV when you only own a Blu-ray player. It’s the field of dreams; if you build it, they will come. Without HiFi equipment, nobody would ever bother to make good recordings. 🎉
Sorry, it won't. If you have 4K tv and watch full HD video, there is process of upscaling that produce arteficial pixels and not making picture better. With arteficial pixels image quality is actually decreasing at pixel level.
Adele's recordings are far from the worst - though I do think Paul might be slightly infatuated with her. Trying listening to most 1970's and 80's rock and pop albums. Flash back to AM radio....
Absolutely! I had an antique Silvertone AM/FM tube mono radio/record player console and it sounded just like it was supposed to while playing AM radio and vintage music. I kick myself for junking it. Just plain stupid I am!
A system must be revealing across the entire frequency range. When one part is accentuated at the cost of the rest, that part is too revealing because it masks the other parts of the range .
Yep. That's called a flat response... Has more to do with your acoustics in the room than the speakers most of the time....
I cannot understate the importance of a great recording. For many years I listened to a wonderful artist, purchased many CDs during this period and enjoyed them. After watching them live with no less than 12 live musicians on stage (2 drummers) I could no longer listen to the CDs as my enjoyment had been destroyed - due to the lack of energy, dynamism and over production in the recordings. They were clearly mastered for playback on a car sound system; and not a good one or over the radio. I have recently turned more towards classical music and live recordings which are a mixed bag. Tinned carrots with never be the same as fresh ones pulled from the garden 🪴 sorry 😞
I dont get it.
I poorly recorded master recording will only put out poor sound no matter the gear you play it on. Let’s blame the recording engineer and where and how the recording was pressed or the CD was burned not the systems it’s played on. A great recording even makes radio shack gear sound good.
Hi, Paul. It's just you and me here at the moment.
There is so much different sounds. Some recordings sounds totally awful whatever sound equipment it is played on. Professional artists sounds good on most equipment, ten times better with expensive stereos.
Too revealing? lol
Question: Is there such a thing as a "perfect" recording? Was the gear used to record the session perfect, was the mixing gear and engineer perfect, etc....? Surely, all recording, like everything else, is made to a "price point". In the 70's and 80's it has been said that a few bands only graded their albums before release in their dang cars. To me most popular music is just noise used to collect money from foolish teenagers. It's sad how I have had to give up on most my former favorite 80's music.
How nice would it be to have a certified recording to measure our "rooms" against?
What can we do to convince Adele to record her music at Octave Records from now on?
Perhaps remaster them there 😂
@@deadandburied7626 Smells like a plan.
I think a good analogy is a guy that's very happy with the looks of his wife or girlfriend until he goes out and gets an expensive pair of glasses that completely corrects his vision and now he realizes she's not near as pretty as he thought she was.. So now he's wondering whether it was really worth spending all that money on those new expensive eyeglasses.
You couldn't find worst comparison! Man are you married? I certainly hope not because if she sees this you would be in a big problem.
"Too revealing" just means your speakers have bumps in either the midrange and/or the treble. Most recordings will sound okay to great on speakers with a linear frequency response. And of course, sometimes they will 'enhance' the sound quality during remastering and that is not always for the better (Genesis CDs).
Personally I don't enjoy equipment that makes everything sound the same . I need those times when a great recording of beautiful music brings tears to my eyes or a lump in my throat .
Performing the same and sounds the same aren't same thing.
It doesn't take that much to have 2 or 3 sources for 1 system. For instance, a CD player analog out to an integrated amp, a 2nd CD player to good DAC, and a streamer, all hooked up to the same amp. Some things will sound better on one or another, and you don't have to give anything up.
Horses for courses.
The late Peter Walker (of QUAD Electronics UK fame) is on record saying"
"Music should be enjoyed, not suffered"
I think this says it all...
Quality over quantity. There's a reason lots of records are relegated to the bargain bin. Quality things cost more to make. If quality is not your priority then you can go to thrift shops and grab dozens of records for a few bucks and have fun that way. Really depends on the consumer.
I agree with Paul. If you listen to the Adele on your clock radio, it’s probably going to sound the same as “Gaucho”. And if that’s what makes your toe tap, great! You’ve saved a TON of dough. But it doesn’t do anything for me. So I’ll take my chances with Adele and also get to listen to a great record and be mesmerized. But, on the flip side, be out a few thousand bucks. Horses for courses.